HowTo talk:Snowboard your way to awesomeness!
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Okay, I've been mulling it over for quite a while and I've come to a decision on it. The problem with the article isn't really the humor itself as much as the prose. It's disjointed and strange sounding in many places. The other thing is this. It's a very enjoyable article. And I'm okay with it being very enjoyable in lieu of gut-wrenchingly hilarious, if you are. Some article just are more suited to be amusing than incredibly funny, but sometimes that's just what works for that particular idea or article, and that's the best way to use it, and it can be enjoyed for that, and that's how I see this article. It makes me feel strangely happy, despite the fact that this guy is getting pummeled. That's a unique way about it. So I'm left to conclude that the reason I didn't find it capable of earning PLS points compared to the others is simply that the prose and grammar are very spotty. There are lots of words used in the wrong context or wrong conjugation, a few sentences that don't make sense, occasional tense shift if I recall, and so forth. I'd be happy to help you out with shaping that bit up if you'd like. Other than that, like most of the other articles I judged, I'd say it would be feature-worthy, but the prose just needs to be fixed. I hope that helps you out. Let me know if you'd like to know anything more specific or anything like that. -06:01, October 13, 2011 (UTC)
It's a really solid piece--I wanted to rank both it and Frosty's article on Rutherford, actually, but there were just five spots. (In a normal PLS without double-digit entries, yours would have easily placed, keep in mind.) The reason I didn't pick your piece and settled on the five that I did is pretty straight forward: yours, while being really solid and probably VFH-worthy as it is, ultimately didn't stand out in terms of humor, concept and work like the other ones did. (Again, not that yours wasn't good--I'd still gladly vote 'for' on VFH.) Scofield did a ton of work on his, Acrolo's piece was really funny in a sort of ridiculously stupid way, Nikau's was conceptually awesome if somewhat sloppily executed, and the two top articles stood out in two or more of those categories. Anyway, for your comments: yours was a really solid HowTo:--I really liked how you employed repetition, and the images obviously fit pretty well. It's well written and well executed, and, well, pretty darn good. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 02:23, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks!! Mattsnow 22:39, October 14, 2011 (UTC)